3 ms·
This probably answers a question I have about genetics - that there just isn't enough variety if reproduction was random. Genetic differences that have no bear
by mozumder 9y ago
This probably answers a question I have about genetics - that there just isn't enough variety if reproduction was random.
Genetic differences that have no bearing on survivability, like skin patterns or colors or whatever, should be widespread through every species, but they're not.
- andai 9y agoThat's really interesting to think about. Somewhat related, I asked a geneticist once why there was so much diversity in humans vs pigeons which all looked the same to me. He said, "We're tuned to notice differences between people, not pigeons. Perhaps we all look the same to them!" Perhaps there is precisely this sort of random variation in the differences we don't notice, because by being oblivious to them they are not sexually selected for or against?
- rsynnott 9y agoIf anything, humans have abnormally _small_ genetic diversity; most species have more. We went through a population trap at some point in the past, and nearly went extinct; we probably lost most of our diversity then.
- azeotropic 9y agoSkin patterns and colors do have impacts on survivability! Some species use camouflage to avoid predation, others use bright coloration to attract mates. There's also a flaw in your premise -- reproduction is not random, it's subject to selection at a number of levels. Most selective forces act to reduce genetic diversity, both at the selected gene, and at nearby genes.